Eucalyptus Public IPs should be submitted in CIDR or range notation
Bug #438565 reported by
Thierry Carrez
This bug affects 1 person
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
eucalyptus (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Wishlist
|
Unassigned | ||
Karmic |
Fix Released
|
Wishlist
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
eucalyptus as of 1.6~bzr854-
Being able to use CIDR notation (192.168.0.128/25 for example) would allow more compact submission.
Changed in eucalyptus (Ubuntu): | |
importance: | Undecided → Wishlist |
status: | New → Triaged |
tags: | added: eucalyptus |
summary: |
- Eucalyptus Public IPs should be submitted in CIDR notation + Eucalyptus Public IPs should be submitted in CIDR or range notation |
To post a comment you must log in.
Eucalyptus apparently already has some crude support for this in net/vnetwork.c
So you *can* specify CIDR-style notation, like 192.168.0.128/25.
However if you specify a CIDR-style network that's not aligned to the first address, then it leads to a somewhat incorrect result:
so this leads to a correct result:
192.168.0.128/25 = 192.168.0.128 - 192.168.0.255 -> eucalyptus assigns 192.168.0.129 - 192.168.0.254
192.168.0.228/30 = 192.168.0.228 - 192.168.0.231 -> eucalyptus assigns 192.168.0.229 - 192.168.0.230
but this doesn't:
192.168.0.230/30 = 192.168.0.228 - 192.168.0.231 -> eucalyptus assigns 192.168.0.231 - 192.168.0.232
192.168.0.130/25 = 192.168.0.128 - 192.168.0.255 -> eucalyptus assigns 192.168.0.130 - 192.168.1.0
though you could argue that those are incorrect.